I think this is the time I should add a few sentences.

On Fri, 20 Jul 2001 11:41:15 -0400, Todd Moody <[log in to unmask]>
and
on Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Marilyn Harris wrote:
>
>> A few questions;
>>
>> 1. Human's teeth are not shaped like those of true carnivores or even
>>some omnivores (like the bear) and therefore imply that we are from a
>>vegetarian origin. Why doesn't the paleo diet reflect our ancestry?
>
>It does.

The Neanderthin style paleo diet does reflect our anchestry in the
upper paleolithicum, this is the time from about 40000 bc to 10000 bc,
in northern climates.
There are no changes in the genetics, teeth shape etc. to expect in such a
short time, like also not in the last 12000 years.

Then there was a time of many million years in our common anchestry with
other primates when our anchestry was near-vegetarian.
You can't say totally vegetarian, as no animal has vegetarianism as a matter
of principle. Apes eat occasionally insects and small animals (some 4%).

In the time between these two extremes, about 2 million years long,
there was time for genetic changes to happen. These formed humans like today
out of more primitive primates. There is much uncertainity about the kind of
nutrition these humanoids had and possibly could have adapted to
(there are very little genetic differences to chimps, even to mice).
I see a slight gut size reduction and teeth size reduction which indicates
the switch from more voluminous food to more dense food.
Such denser foods will have been nuts, roots, tubers and carrion.

The ingenious and manual capabilities will have allowed humans to exploit
new food resources, including to hunt without claws and fangs.
However the history of weapons among humans doesn't reach over the full 2
mio years. The first tools, "hand axes" are small sharp stones well suited
for a lot of work, including to open carrion, but hardly to hunt.
Wooden spears (which weren't thrown) appeared after some time (maybe 1 mio
years). There's a first evidence of such wooden spears 300k years back.
Weapons which come closer to big game hunting, like arrows, stone
spear-heads and fish hooks appeared *very* much later, most in the upper
paleolithicum.
The Neanderthals managed to pursue big game hunting with primitive spears
even. Neanderthals lived from ca. 200k years back.
It looks we are not related to Neanderthals apart from common anchestors
600k years back.

> There have never been vegetarian populations of humans
>or hominids.  For at least 2.5 millions years humans and their
>predecessors (at least since Australopithecus) have eaten meat,
>in addition to plant foods, of course.

True.
Chimps eat some termites, and austropithecines will have too, plus maybe
some small animals.
To what extent this justifies to rely ones nutrition in big parts on meats
only, like Eskimo do, or Neanderthal and late paleolithical cavemen did
is a question I definitely answer in the negative.

The real essence and real common thing among any attempts to paleolithic
nutrition is in my opinion
1.freshness
2.unprocessedness
Then there is some scepticism about food items which are inedible raw.

Anything other are can have's and could have's and can be left open.

>> 2. The human colon is more similar to other vegetarian animals' colons -
ie;
>> long. Carnivores tend to have short colons. Does this not also point to a
>> more vegetarian ancestry?

>This is often heard, but not entirely accurate.

The humon colon and gut is in fact shorter than that of big apes
or other herbivores, which have the colon for cellulose processing.
And it is in fact much longer than that of carnivores.

> There is a lot
>of good information about this sort of thing at
>http://beyondveg.com, but I suggest in particular that you read

I'm sceptic about many "informations" in beyondveg, it has to be taken with
care. I've encountered obiously wrong information, like the meat energy
calculation for !Kung. I've inquired about this but didn't find an ear.
The "food volume" article ventures to state that fruitaranism was
impossible, because of the big volumes fruit and vegetables would require
(4-8 kg for 2000 kcal). Whithout any actual stomach size computations.
And ignoring the densest food available in the nature of this earth: nuts.
Beeing "not mainstream".
It brings up a lot of interesting discussion.
Alas you can feel it's written with an ex-vegetarians intent.

>Loren Cordain's summary of the issues in
>http://beyondveg.com/cordain-l/metab-carn/metabolic-carnivory-1a.shtml

Loren Cordain is an impressive source of information to read.
This article, which enumerates some food properties available exclusive or
best from animals, relies on selected single studies (like "Salem et al.
1994"). Which suppose, that certain ingredients like long chain fatty acids
might be inefficient for humans to make in our own system.
Which in this example ignores the millions of vegetarians *and* meat eaters
who never eat such animal sources, like brain/marrow/fatty fish.
And still have a brain.

>
>> 3. What is exactly wrong with grains?
>
>The basic view is that grains were not part of the paleolithic
>diet, so our attempts to emulate that diet should also exclude
>them.  Although it is clear (to me, anyway) that some people
>manage to be quite healthy and long-lived despite eating grains,
>it is also true that grains are implicated in the spread of a
>number of autoimmune and degenerative diseases.  Again, rather
>that repeat what others have done better, I'll refer you again to
>Loren Cordain:
>http://beyondveg.com/cordain-l/grains-leg/grains-legumes-1a.shtml

Grains, "humanity's double edged sword" are Prof.Cordaine's realm.
In short all the negative points rely on the antinutrients particularly
grains have: phytin, tannins, lectins
(additional points by Loren Cordaine in his book treat disadvantages a
grain-only nutrition like in poor countries without necessary additional
items has).
These antinutrients make it impossible to make them a *staple* without
processing techniques like soaking/germination/heating.
This is IMO very important as it's ignored by many modern "health food"
adepts. These items have to be processed traditionally.

This all doesn't forbid and didn't prevent that grass seeds and other
seeds (like acorns) actually have been processed and eaten by paleolithic
humans.

Enough for a small summary..........

regards

Amadeus
(See a paleolithic cave painting on http://www.geocities.com/paleolix/
with some wild grass harvesters, Bob).